Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 112 Vt. 143 - Smith v. Badlam

Smith v. Badlam’s Empirical Analysis

1941

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
6
states following
August 1988
most recently cited

10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently August 1988

10 state decisions

4019411950196019701980decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Harriss v. Tams · McAllister v. Benjamin · Cabot v. Christie · Fitzgerald v. Metropolitan Life Insurance · Hunt v. Lewis

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “An agent is not liable because of misrepresentations of the principal or of another agent unless he knows or should know of them. He is not affected by the knowledge of facts [that] the principal or another agent has and which, if known to him, would cause his representations to be fraudulent. An agent who makes untrue statements based upon the information given to him by the principal is not liable because of the fact that the principal knew the information to be untrue. An agent can properly rely upon statements of the principal to the same extent as upon statements from any other reputable source.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““However, the fact that the representations took a declaratory form does not of itself necessarily imply that the defendant made the representations ‘as of his own knowledge.’ ””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.